Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
What some of you are saying isn't entirely accurate. This was not sold separately. It was a while-supplies-last "pre-order" freebie.

actually it was available seperatly as well for $15

Quote:
Invelos has approved a contribution for it. If you don't want the profile in your collection, don't download it.

agree, it's in the database so i see no problem with updating the images with better quality ones. If you don't want it don't download it. It's not anyone and I don't think it takes up that much more space on the servers for 1 profile

-Agrare

Quoting Agrare:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
What some of you are saying isn't entirely accurate. This was not sold separately. It was a while-supplies-last "pre-order" freebie.

actually it was available seperatly as well for $15



-Agrare

If you bought it that way, the store sold it incorrectly. Your $15 "pre-pay" is to be applied to the purchase of the DVD when you pick up your copy. Of course, you have to show your receipt at most stores.  Even if you bought it on the same day as you got your DVD, the $15 for the pre-pay and  "Bonus Steel Case" is supposed to be applied to the purchase of the DVD. These were not to be sold separately as an individual purchase.

Gather your receipts and go get your money back from the store.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
The only problem I have with that stance is that it can be applied to just about anything.

VHS profiles...Invelos has approved a contribution for it. If you don't want the profile in your collection, don't download it.

UMD profiles...Invelos has approved a contribution for it. If you don't want the profile in your collection, don't download it.

Pirated profiles...Invelos has approved a contribution for it. If you don't want the profile in your collection, don't download it.

If I can get a video game profile approved, will it be supported like this?

no unless you want to ignore the whole "What to contribute section"

Quote:
Contribute only the following items to the main database:

"DVD Video, HD-DVD Video, and Blu-ray Video" discs (including MiniDVD): These discs contain movies, television shows, music performances and other professionally-produced and sold DVDs. No CDs, DVD-Audio discs, video games, Video CDs, or VHS titles will be accepted.
“DVD Video”: These discs, included as bonus discs with CDs or video games are accepted, but only contribute the DVD Video information.
Dual-Disc DVDs (which store both “DVD Video” and “DVD Audio” information): These can be contributed, but include “DVD Video” information only.
The main database should contain information about legal, professionally produced discs. Do not contribute "bootleg", other illegal DVDs, or privately created DVDs even though the content may be film or TV.

it specifically says no to VHS, Pirated, and Video Games. You could probably argue UMD either way. I don't know enough about it to know if the disc it uses are DVD so could fit into the first category. But since there is no UMD media type I'd say that's pretty good reason for it not to be.

I understand the 'just because it's in doesn't mean its right'. I downloaded the profile to look at it. The way it was put in it would appear to the screeners that it was just another release of the blu-ray. They might not have been aware of the fact that it's just an empty case.

However, since it is a case for the blu-ray I really don't see a problem with a profile for it existing in the database but I can also see why people would say it shouldn't be. However I think it's ultimatly up to Ken\Invelos and since there has been no official comment in this thread from them and the profile is in the database I would think its ok, but again it's not really my call.

But per the OP's actual question, I think that the marketing material that is wrapped around the slip cover should not be part of the image. once you open the shrink wrap it would fall off. We don't include stickers that are on the shrink wrap and this is similar imho.

Looking at the contribution notes he tried 3 times, even explaining that this is just marketing material and it was still denied. Don't know what the votes and comments were but the issue of should this profile be in the database to begin with aside (because lets face it, that is a seperate issue) I see no reason that the image should have been declined (and while I haven't reread the thread I don't think there was much comments on that other than the few UPC ones) but that is the issue here, not the validity of the profile.

-Agrare

it doesn't appear you read my entire post so I'll summarize it for you

1) rules prohibate all the items you stated, so even if they are snuck in they still don't belong
2) I understand just because this profile is there doesn't mean it should be
3) based on the contribution history my guess would be the screeners didn't know it was an empty case
4) the posters question is regarding the cover image and if its correct to include the including marketing material as part of the scan not the validity of the profile (since this is a valid point in and of itself an answer to this question in general is benificial instead of complaining that the specific profile shouldn't exist
5) I could make an arguement for or against this profile if I was so inclined, but that's not the topic of this thread.

-Agrare

Ok, I'll admit taking that view answers this specific question but this same type of packaging, call it a promotional wrapper between case and shrink wrap happens in other cases. So in a general sense what is the answer to the question for what the correct images are then?

Also, if this was packaged slightly differently, say you got both cases. the normal blu-ray case with the dvds and the steelbook and they were both shrink wrapped together how would you handle that? I think the rules should be updated so this can be handled the same way.

-Agrare

I can see this issue cropping "Up" again real soon...if you pre-order Up at Best Buy (either DVD or Blu-ray), you can get a free steelbook case.  I hate these trends!